D.C. Circuit· 6/12/1968
James Hemphill v. United States
Citations
- 402 F.2d 187
- 131 U.S. App. D.C. 46
- 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6575
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- reversing conviction of first-degree murder for failure to prove premeditation, and remanding to “permitf] sentencing for second-degree murder without a new trial”
- invalidating first-degree murder conviction where “[t]he attack was without warning or apparent reason”
- defendant brutally assaulted female acquaintance before murdering her sleeping 10-year-old grandson; evidence of premeditation and deliberation held insufficient
- no inference of premeditation where defendant may have obtained murder weapon at scene of crime
- no inference of premeditation where defendant may have obtained murder weapon at scene of crime
- time to walk up stairs consistent with finding that killing was product of deliberation, when motive was shown
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Wright, Tamm, Leventhal
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
33 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- People v. PerezCalifornia Supreme Court· 1992-07-09· cited 427×
- United States v. Guillermo Novo Sampol, United States of America v. Alvin Ross Diaz, United States of America v. Ignacio Novo SampolD.C. Circuit· 1980-12-09· cited 283×
- Frendak v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1979-10-24· cited 162×
- Colvin v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1984-03-16· cited 90×
- Mills v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1991-08-21· cited 79×
- United States v. Dewey BobbittD.C. Circuit· 1971-11-18· cited 66×
- Jones v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1984-05-31· cited 64×
- United States v. Alexander SuttonD.C. Circuit· 1969-11-07· cited 58×
- Clifton Gregory v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1969-04-25· cited 54×
- United States v. BegayNinth Circuit· 2011-01-12· cited 52×
- United States v. James David Blue Thunder, (Two Cases)Eighth Circuit· 1979-10-09· cited 51×
- United States v. Curtis L. CollinsFifth Circuit· 1982-10-15· cited 51×
- Stanley v. CoxFourth Circuit· 1973-10-16· cited 46×
- Porter v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2003-06-19· cited 43×
- United States v. Freddie A. BrooksD.C. Circuit· 1971-06-29· cited 41×
- Commonwealth v. BachertSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1979-10-19· cited 39×
- United States v. Daniel Jackson TalbertNinth Circuit· 1983-07-12· cited 29×
- State v. LindseySupreme Court of Missouri· 1974-03-11· cited 29×
- Peter Kenneth Demarrias v. United StatesEighth Circuit· 1972-01-03· cited 28×
- United States v. Anita G. WhitlockD.C. Circuit· 1980-12-04· cited 28×
Cites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- United States v. WadeSupreme Court· 1967-06-12· cited 8,442×
- Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court· 1967-06-12· cited 6,066×
- Curley v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1947-01-13· cited 568×
- Bernard Austin v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1967-06-16· cited 234×
- Jefferson Crawford v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1967-02-17· cited 191×
- Paul Belton v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1967-09-28· cited 164×
- Francina King v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1967-02-01· cited 108×
- Schaefer v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1920-03-01· cited 95×
- George E. Wise v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1967-10-04· cited 95×
- Charles McGill v. United States of America, Walter M. Hinton v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1965-06-29· cited 72×
- James O. Scurry v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1965-05-29· cited 59×
- Harold S. Cross v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1965-11-02· cited 42×
- Famous Smith v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1894-01-03· cited 28×
- Paul O. Hansborough v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1962-10-22· cited 16×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.